Teh Gays told you that marriage equality wouldn’t impact your marriage. They told you that they just wanted basic civil rights — petty stuff, like the right to be with their partner in the hospital, the right to health insurance, the right to adopt children, and the right to share in end-of-life and other medical decisions. They told you that your marriage wasn’t threatened, and that expanding such an important institution was a good thing.
Well, they lied.
Last month, Rachel Bird exchanged vows with Gideon Codding in a church wedding in front of family and friends. As far as Bird is concerned, she is a bride.
To the state of California, however, she is either “Party A” or “Party B.”
Those are the terms that have replaced “bride” and “groom” on the state’s new gender-neutral marriage licenses. And to Bird and Codding, that is unacceptable.
“We are traditionalists – we just want to be called bride and groom,” said Bird, 25, who works part time for her father’s church. “Those words have been used for generations and now they just changed them.”
In May, after the California State Supreme Court ruled same-sex marriage legal, the courts mandated state officials to provide gender-neutral licenses and other marriage forms. “Bride” and “groom” became “Party A” and “Party B.”
Bird and Codding have refused to complete the new forms, a stand that has already cost them. Because their marriage is not registered with the state, Bird cannot sign up for Codding’s medical benefits or legally take his name. They are now exploring their options, she said.
Bird’s father, Doug Bird, pastor of Roseville’s Abundant Life Fellowship, said he is urging couples not to sign the new marriage forms, and that he is getting some support from congregants and colleagues at local churches.
“I would encourage you to refuse to sign marriage licenses with ‘Party A’ and ‘Party B,’ ” he wrote in a letter that he sent to them. “If ever there was a time for the people of the United States to stand up and let their voices be heard – this is that time.”
It’s so true. And you know, this whole dating-in-New-York thing totally sucks. As a traditionalist, I would really prefer to go back to the time when my father found a proper suitor for me, and then basically sold me for a reasonable price. It’s tradition, and if it weren’t for bitches getting all uppity about their “rights,” it would have never changed. We’ve gone so far down the path to Hell that now the terms “bride” and “groom” — added into marital documents specifically so that we’d all know who called the shots and who controlled all the money and assets — are being replaced with gender-neutral terms. I thought the ladies demanding their own credit cards and checking accounts was bad enough; now with The Gays getting married, the whole system is fucked. After all, gender-neutral terms implies that a marriage is a partnership between two parties, and not a hierarchy. And that, my fine friends, is unacceptable.
If ever there was a time for the people of the United States to stand up and let their voices be heard – this is that time.
I think a lawyer from a far-right organization says it best:
“Those who support (same-sex marriage) say it has no impact on heterosexuals,” said Brad Dacus of the Pacific Justice Institute. “This debunks that argument.”
Indeed. Although really, the argument was debunked when the first straight person had to arrange two little plastic groom decorations atop a wedding cake. That’s some fucked up shit, y’all. And I for one am sick of these gays impacting my relationship and my livelihood. Hopefully the cake issue is next on the Pacific Justice Institute’s docket.
Similar Posts (automatically generated):
- Miss California deserved the “assholes” tag by Jill April 30, 2009
- Defending Marriage by Jill September 7, 2006
- Gun Proponents Take Aim at Domestic Violence Survivors by Jill June 30, 2010
- Jackass of the Day by Jill November 21, 2008
- National Organiztion for Marriage Warns of a “Gathering Storm” of Gay Rights by Cara April 9, 2009